UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Other Forums and Organisations => Jeremy Bamber forum => Topic started by: Amanda3266 on April 06, 2014, 10:24:30 AM
-
....as well as a tad mischievous I think. 8(0(*
He puts his points across well but really winds up the more bizarre people there. I have to say I agree with much of what he says.
He starts his posts with sentences like "Having established with my last post that Jeremy is guilty...."
It doesn't alf cause a fuss!
In actual fact I like some of the posts people make there, there are some sensible people there too but my goodness it gets heated sometimes.
Just wondering if "Adam" is a poster moonlighting from here .
-
He is at it again........has started a thread with the "questions the pro-Bamber people must answer".
They are fuming.....am amazed that Mike Tesko hasn't banned him to be honest.
-
I cant see why Mike should ban him. Adam is entitled to his view as any of the Bamber followers. Would be unfair to ban him for for believing Bamber guilty. Years ago, when the blue forum was set up there was an equal mix of pro and guilters, it made for some great posts. Theyre just going over old ground now, its all been done before. I still pop over for a read.
-
They're not furious as far as I can see, they're debating it and nobody is being 'out of order', 'horrible' et al. Mike has no reason to ban him, infact he's been very chatty lately and answering people's question but he did that before. Most of the posters who post on both use their own names or the same user name. I couldn't get my own when I re-joined so I had to shorten it.
I don't even know why we have to have a board dedicated to them, let them debate what they like, they don't cause us any trouble, I think if there's an issue, join them and sort it out rather than antagonise them here.
Awaits, second ban ?>)()<
-
I can understand why Mike wouldn't allow Scipio to join the blue forum (presumably that's still the case.) After a couple of Scipio's brilliant posts Mike, and especially Gladys, would just resort to sarcasm and abuse.
-
I cant see why Mike should ban him. Adam is entitled to his view as any of the Bamber followers. Would be unfair to ban him for for believing Bamber guilty. Years ago, when the blue forum was set up there was an equal mix of pro and guilters, it made for some great posts. Theyre just going over old ground now, its all been done before. I still pop over for a read.
Absolutely correct Andrea. There never will be anything new, it has all been gone over so many times. Even Simon McKay has stopped talking of a miscarriage of justice since he has been educated in the facts.
-
Absolutely correct Andrea. There never will be anything new, it has all been gone over so many times. Even Simon McKay has stopped talking of a miscarriage of justice since he has been educated in the facts.
Never say never! Two amazing cases that have come to light recently.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-26540604
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26762099
-
They're not furious as far as I can see, they're debating it and nobody is being 'out of order', 'horrible' et al. Mike has no reason to ban him, infact he's been very chatty lately and answering people's question but he did that before. Most of the posters who post on both use their own names or the same user name. I couldn't get my own when I re-joined so I had to shorten it.
I don't even know why we have to have a board dedicated to them, let them debate what they like, they don't cause us any trouble, I think if there's an issue, join them and sort it out rather than antagonise them here.
Awaits, second ban ?>)()<
Oh Joanne don't be such a spoil sport. It's only harmless banter. Look at all the stick I get on here about my adoption themed posts and posts in general; Scipio telling me I am a liar, have mental health issues etc, etc. No one bats an eyelid including your good self. It doesn't bother me in the slightest. It really is like water off a ducks back. I think posters have to expect a bit of banter/stick. Its the nature of the beast ie debating forums. Take a look at Parliament and Prime Minister's Questions - it can be an absolute bear pit @)(++(* And they have a speaker present to oversee it @)(++(*
David Cameron at Parliament
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3YjCudUpIk
Nigel Farage at the European Parliament
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bypLwI5AQvY
Julia Gillard at the Australian Parliament
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nvlN1dTn0c
@)(++(* 8@??)(
-
I wonder if Adam is aware that the person currently purporting that he is not a Bamber supporter once STATED that he wished that he himself had murdered the Bamber family, including the boys, so that "At least Jeremy would be off the hook."
Sounds pretty supportive to me.
-
Hmmm... sounds like Keiraline with her 70:30 guilty stance >@@(*&)
I'm surprised Adam survived the cull.
-
Hmmm... sounds like Keiraline with her 70:30 guilty stance >@@(*&)
I'm surprised Adam survived the cull.
Adam doesn't challenge Mike.
-
Don’t believe everything Adam says. I have just looked at the Blue Forum and he has stated Carol An Lee interviewed Bamber. What utter rubbish. CAL and I used to email each other regularly and the prison refused to let her visit him as she is a journalist. Jeremy wanted her to visit to discuss the writing of her book. She wasn’t even allowed on his phone list. People make claims which are totally false. At least on here we do our homework first!
-
Don’t believe everything Adam says. I have just looked at the Blue Forum and he has stated Carol An Lee interviewed Bamber. What utter rubbish. CAL and I used to email each other regularly and the prison refused to let her visit him as she is a journalist. Jeremy wanted her to visit to discuss the writing of her book. She wasn’t even allowed on his phone list. People make claims which are totally false. At least on here we do our homework first!
Somewhere in the back of my mind I seem to recall reading that the book was marketed on her having interviewed Jeremy. There are certainly posters on blue who were once on his phone list and had been generous with their time and support. There is one who needs us to know that she, too, was on his phone list. However, he removed her from it.
-
Somewhere in the back of my mind I seem to recall reading that the book was marketed on her having interviewed Jeremy. There are certainly posters on blue who were once on his phone list and had been generous with their time and support. There is one who needs us to know that she, too, was on his phone list. However, he removed her from it.
And no doubt dumped her because she unwittingly further exposed his guilt 8@??)(
-
And no doubt dumped her because she unwittingly further exposed his guilt 8@??)(
Don't think that particular person thinks he's guilty Steph 8(0(*
-
Don’t believe everything Adam says. I have just looked at the Blue Forum and he has stated Carol An Lee interviewed Bamber. What utter rubbish. CAL and I used to email each other regularly and the prison refused to let her visit him as she is a journalist. Jeremy wanted her to visit to discuss the writing of her book. She wasn’t even allowed on his phone list. People make claims which are totally false. At least on here we do our homework first!
Depends what you mean by "interviewed" - according to CAL she wrote to him (and he back) from early 2012 to December 2014 when he stopped communication altogether. So I don't think every letter concerned what the weather was like, or how many hybristophiliacs were on his mailing list. More likely to be relevant penetrating questions as one would expect from a journalist/non-fiction author.
-
Depends what you mean by "interviewed" - according to CAL she wrote to him (and he back) from early 2012 to December 2014 when he stopped communication altogether. So I don't think every letter concerned what the weather was like, or how many hybristophiliacs were on his mailing list. More likely to be relevant penetrating questions as one would expect from a journalist/non-fiction author.
Have to admit, I had to look that word up but it'a gudun! @)(++(* @)(++(*
-
Have to admit, I had to look that word up but it'a gudun! @)(++(* @)(++(*
There's certainly a potential 8(0(* Not certain about the others, but likely some are @)(++(*